Are there verified online reviews or ratings for Pete Sulack from former patients?
Executive summary
Available online profiles and business pages show multiple places where patients could leave ratings for Pete (Peter) Sulack — Yelp listing for Redeem Chiropractic (claims founder Pete Sulack and many patients) and third‑party doctor/profile sites such as WebMD and Healthgrades — and book/audible customer reviews exist for his publications [1] [2] [3] [4]. However, the provided sources do not include a consolidated set of verified patient reviews specifically labelled “former patients” of Dr. Pete Sulack beyond site snippets and testimonials on his own clinic pages [1] [5] [6].
1. Where you can look for patient reviews right now — and what those listings show
Public directories that commonly host patient reviews list Dr. Pete (Peter) Sulack. Yelp has a business page for Redeem Chiropractic that identifies Sulack as the founder and states the clinic has “over 1 million patient visits” and “thousands of satisfied patients,” signaling a presence where patient feedback may appear [1]. WebMD hosts a profile for “Peter Charles Sulack, DC” with fields for patient ratings and feedback questions (e.g., check‑in, listening, follow‑up, recommendation) indicating that user reviews are supported on that platform [2]. Healthgrades carries a profile for “Dr. Peter Sulack, DC” that shows a high “likelihood of recommending” metric (5 out of 5) in its snippet, implying past patient input is or has been recorded [3].
2. Direct testimonials, self‑published endorsements and clinic pages — useful but not independent
Redeem Health / Redeem Chiropractic’s own about page and related business material present testimonials and claims of broad patient reach and satisfaction tied directly to Sulack’s leadership [5] [1]. His personal website and Progressive Medical Center consultant profile also recount his clinical work and patient‑facing roles [6] [7]. These pages provide testimonials and narrative context but are not independent third‑party reviews; they reflect the provider’s organization and should be treated as self‑reported or curated content [5] [6] [7].
3. Book and product reviews are available but do not equal clinical patient ratings
Readers and customers have left reviews for Sulack’s books (example: reviews for Unhealthy Anonymous on ChristianBook and an Audible author page), which give insight into how readers evaluate his writing and advice but do not substitute for verified clinical patient reviews about hands‑on care or outcomes [4] [8]. These platforms are valid for gauging public reception of his publications but do not confirm medical treatment experiences.
4. What’s missing from the available reporting
The assembled sources do not provide a single, verifiable compilation of former patient reviews explicitly tied to clinical outcomes or a verified patient‑review audit (available sources do not mention a consolidated verified patient‑review repository). The snippets show that mainstream doctor review mechanisms exist on WebMD and Healthgrades, and Yelp hosts the business listing that likely contains user reviews, but the current results do not include the specific review texts, dates, or verification badges that would allow independent verification of former‑patient identities or medical outcomes [2] [3] [1].
5. How to verify patient reviews yourself — practical next steps
Search the Yelp Redeem Chiropractic page and look for individual user reviews and dates to assess authenticity and frequency; Yelp listings often show many reviews and reviewer histories [1]. Check the WebMD and Healthgrades profiles for patient comments, ratings, and whether the profiles display response history or review moderation notes [2] [3]. For broader context, review his clinic’s About page and Progressive Medical Center consultant profile to separate promotional claims from independent feedback [5] [7]. For claims about outcomes (for example, his widely reported remission narrative), note those are reported in interviews and clinic bios rather than as patient review data [9] [7] [8].
6. Competing perspectives and the hidden agenda to watch for
Clinic and personal websites present favorable narratives and curated testimonials that serve marketing aims; Redeem’s claim of “over 1 million patient visits” and “thousands of satisfied patients” promotes scale and credibility but comes from affiliated pages [1] [5]. Independent platforms (WebMD, Healthgrades, Yelp) aggregate user feedback but can vary in verification rigor and may include bias from enthusiastic supporters or detractors — check reviewer histories and dates for patterns [2] [3] [1]. Book‑review platforms reflect reader satisfaction with his ideas rather than clinical effectiveness [4] [8].
Limitations: this analysis uses only the documents you provided; I do not assert the presence or absence of specific individual patient reviews beyond what those snippets show [1] [2] [3] [4].